need a fast and simplistic/efficient wm for school

[ratch3t.x]

im proposing to my school to use linux, (fedora core) or suse actually. but probably more likely fedora core. I wanted to know the best desktop interface for a school enviornment. I was thinking xfce would be a good choice because not many people would understand the lighter enviornments (fluxbox/blackbox) or e17, but e17 isn't stable :/ so I'm mostly leaning towards xfce.

[Keruskerfuerst]

Yes, a good choice would be xfce.

[mose]

If your pc are capable of running them I would suggest Gnome or KDE, because I think that they may appear more easy to people used to Windows. Maybe xfce could "scare" them. I don't suggest e17 at all.

[adekoba]

if your hardware is capable, use gnome. if they're going to be available to the public, accessibility is more important than efficiency

[ratch3t.x]

i know e17 is a horrible pick i just like it, lately ive been quite fond of fluxbox though ive been working on a theme

[mose]

Enlightenment and fluxbox are very good WM, but if your plan is teach children to use Linux, I think you should give them somewhat easier to deal with.
In my opinion Gnome is extremely clean and very simple, but KDE is a good choiche too.

[sonicbhoc]

KDE all the way if you need something reminiscent of Windows, more familiar or moderately easy to use. I don't really like GNOME but because my opinion is biased against it don't take my word for it when I say I don't like it. I think its TOO simple, some useful features are missing.

You could get KDE too look like gnome if you wanted to, though...

If you want simple, any WM that ends in the word "box" (fluxbox is the most popular) would be a good choice, although it involves a LOT of config. I second xfce, though, if you want something simple that's not TOO simple but not too bloated either. As an added bonus, xfce can also autoload kde and gnome libraries on boot if you tell it to.

[ratch3t.x]

actually its for a bunch of teens, mostly 15-18 and its for 9-12 -- i'll probably go with gnome or xfce, kde is yet very simple but doesn't it use more system specs then gnome? actually -- im not sure if some of the computers can run gnome anyway. i think the switch to linux wont be immediately but i think the schools going to need a plan instead of windows fiji and vienna so im looking ahead

[mose]

If you tell us the detail of the pcs on which you plan to install Gnome we can give you an idea about the performance.

[madisonicus]

Easier is a matter of opinion. Personally, I can't stand icons since you're never really sure what they mean. Plus, to this day I can't figure out whether I'm supposed to single click or double click them because it changes from context to context. And Xgl... I get seasick watching it all swoop and dance and wriggle when I'm just trying to log out. Who needs all that bling bling on a moment to moment basis? It's like driving in one of those drunkenness simulators.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm no luddite. I use fluxbox and plenty of kde/gnome apps. I just have no interest in watching my computer play with itself just because it can or in trying to decipher pictograms (didn't we develop alphabets thousands of years ago because no one could use pictograms effectively??).

Honestly, I think GUI's and the graphics obsession make computers much harder to use and much less intuitive. I think graphics are essential to modern computing, and I love them when they don't interfere with my use of the computer. That's why I use something simple and straightforward like fluxbox.

Overall, it makes much more sense to me (and would be much easier to teach, I'd think) to open up a terminal and type the name of the program you want to start, rather than hunting through 4 layers of drop down menus (and watching them roll bcak up because you moved the cursor 1 pixel too far) to locate the thing you're looking for.

For this discussion, Eric Raymond's Unix Koans are a must read: http://catb.org/~esr/writings/unix-koans/. The one on GUI's is absolutely brilliant.

-m

[adekoba]

Easier is a matter of opinion. Personally, I can't stand icons since you're never really sure what they mean. Plus, to this day I can't figure out whether I'm supposed to single click or double click them because it changes from context to context. And Xgl... I get seasick watching it all swoop and dance and wriggle when I'm just trying to log out. Who needs all that bling bling on a moment to moment basis? It's like driving in one of those drunkenness simulators.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm no luddite. I use fluxbox and plenty of kde/gnome apps. I just have no interest in watching my computer play with itself just because it can or in trying to decipher pictograms (didn't we develop alphabets thousands of years ago because no one could use pictograms effectively??).

Honestly, I think GUI's and the graphics obsession make computers much harder to use and much less intuitive. I think graphics are essential to modern computing, and I love them when they don't interfere with my use of the computer. That's why I use something simple and straightforward like fluxbox.

Overall, it makes much more sense to me (and would be much easier to teach, I'd think) to open up a terminal and type the name of the program you want to start, rather than hunting through 4 layers of drop down menus (and watching them roll bcak up because you moved the cursor 1 pixel too far) to locate the thing you're looking for.

For this discussion, Eric Raymond's Unix Koans are a must read: http://catb.org/~esr/writings/unix-koans/. The one on GUI's is absolutely brilliant.

-m

i agree, i choose wm's by their functionality and efficiency, gui is usually needless crap.

but, as i said before, 98% of the people in my high school wouldn't know what to do with a terminal if their life depended on it. addressability > functionality when it comes to cases like this. people are used to windows and gui is all they've ever known (and i don't blame them for favoring the gui, xp's command line is poop).

[stobbsm]

xfce, as it can look great, simple, or bloated.

However you want it to look really.

[zietbukuel]

I think GNOME is a good choise, since it's easy to use.

[arpunk]

im proposing to my school to use linux, (fedora core) or suse actually. but probably more likely fedora core. I wanted to know the best desktop interface for a school enviornment. I was thinking xfce would be a good choice because not many people would understand the lighter enviornments (fluxbox/blackbox) or e17, but e17 isn't stable :/ so I'm mostly leaning towards xfce.

GNOME just fits the school enviroment requeriment (more than any other WM previously mentioned).

[ratch3t.x]

well im hoping that the school will take up a grant from a vendor or something. for my gfx class were running intel pentium 3(s) with about 256 mb of sdram. which can barely run window's apps for the gfx software. and about 30 gb hd, if the school gets a grand i don't expect anything huge but it would be something like 512 mb ddr ram, and intel pentium 4 2.5+ ghz and 40 gb hard drives, unsure still, just looking ahead so i can answer the questions i'll be asked : )

[Moji]

I'd use something light weight such as openbox or fluxbox.

You can add all of the apps you'll need through the text menu.
Since in theory the people using the system can read, figuring out what the menu "Text Editors" leads to is allot easier than trying to decipher what the hell "two small birds over blue background with faded sky" means.
The move away from pictograms has simplified our lives and made communication easier, this weird regression to image based systems is beyond me.

Beyond the esthetics I've found lighter weight window managers to be more stable. Seems that computers like shuffling around hieroglyphs about as much as I do.

From the point of view of the system admin I'd advocate for a smaller window managers anyways since you don't want to be forced into installing a bunch of random stuff you don't need, just so people that shouldn't be messing around with things anyways, can play with things that you didn't want to start with.

In addition, since your systems aren't in any danger of setting industry performance benchmarks, you would be best served by a window manager that uses as few of your system's limited resources as possible.

-MJ

[tylerwylie]

give them default fvwm with a bare menu. that'll show them!

[wmakowski]

Have you thought about using existing hardware in a thin client structure? Something that may be of interest to you is the Linux Terminal Server Project. It may solve your funding issue and make maintenance easier in the long run. From what I have read so far you can run Gnome or KDE on older systems since all the power needed is provided by the server.

I found this article at Linux Planet that provides a good overview.

The LTSP website is also a good resource. It looks like many schools are taking this approach - http://www.k12ltsp.org/

Bill

[mose]

well im hoping that the school will take up a grant from a vendor or something. for my gfx class were running intel pentium 3(s) with about 256 mb of sdram. which can barely run window's apps for the gfx software. and about 30 gb hd, if the school gets a grand i don't expect anything huge but it would be something like 512 mb ddr ram, and intel pentium 4 2.5+ ghz and 40 gb hard drives, unsure still, just looking ahead so i can answer the questions i'll be asked : )

I think that with that hardware you can run Gnome without problems.

And... I'm sorry fot the OT... but I have to ask...

tylerwylie: is that the great Eddie Van Halen on your avatar?

[Bornio]

Easier is a matter of opinion. Personally, I can't stand icons since you're never really sure what they mean. Plus, to this day I can't figure out whether I'm supposed to single click or double click them because it changes from context to context. And Xgl... I get seasick watching it all swoop and dance and wriggle when I'm just trying to log out. Who needs all that bling bling on a moment to moment basis? It's like driving in one of those drunkenness simulators.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm no luddite. I use fluxbox and plenty of kde/gnome apps. I just have no interest in watching my computer play with itself just because it can or in trying to decipher pictograms (didn't we develop alphabets thousands of years ago because no one could use pictograms effectively??).

Honestly, I think GUI's and the graphics obsession make computers much harder to use and much less intuitive. I think graphics are essential to modern computing, and I love them when they don't interfere with my use of the computer. That's why I use something simple and straightforward like fluxbox.

Overall, it makes much more sense to me (and would be much easier to teach, I'd think) to open up a terminal and type the name of the program you want to start, rather than hunting through 4 layers of drop down menus (and watching them roll bcak up because you moved the cursor 1 pixel too far) to locate the thing you're looking for.

For this discussion, Eric Raymond's Unix Koans are a must read: http://catb.org/~esr/writings/unix-koans/. The one on GUI's is absolutely brilliant.

-m

i agree, i choose wm's by their functionality and efficiency, gui is usually needless crap.

but, as i said before, 98% of the people in my high school wouldn't know what to do with a terminal if their life depended on it. addressability > functionality when it comes to cases like this. people are used to windows and gui is all they've ever known (and i don't blame them for favoring the gui, xp's command line is poop).

This is the reason why OSX and Windows will always lead.
Terminal? As much as I like it, and I have it open ALL the time and use it from anywhere... We are in 2007 people! Terminal is just so 1970s

[Dralnu]

This is the reason why OSX and Windows will always lead.
Terminal? As much as I like it, and I have it open ALL the time and use it from anywhere... We are in 2007 people! Terminal is just so 1970s

This is also why there is KDE, Gnome, Fluxbox, Openbox, WMII, FVWM, PekWM, DWM, among only a few hundred others. The GUI is a nice tool, but like anything else, its just a tool - it has limited uses, and for anything else its a pain to work with. Alot of people think a term is outdated, but until they have a mind-to-machine interface, for alot of crap is beats anything else made (for people who know what they are doing).

Its kind of like saying fire is so <insert really old date here>. We should just use electricity to cook everything. Problem is, you lack the control and some of the abilities with electricity you have with fire - same with a GUI and a term.

IMHO, look at your audience. Are they semi-technically proficient? If so, a lighter WM with a few apps may be better then, say, KDE or Gnome (less running in the background if they don't need but a few apps). If they know nothing of PCs, and are Windows users, then try KDE. Macs? Gnome.

Based on those system specs, I'd actually look into a thinclient system. If you could set up a few in a cluster, and kept things to something like Fluxbox/Openbox. With some minor configuration, you could set it up to be fairly user-friendly.

[dforsyth]

Id say you should go for an openbox + gnome panel system, mainly because most non-computer savvy users are so used to a panel/start menu type of setup. If thats not an option, then definately go with GNOME.

But like Dranlu said, you should really take a good hard look at your audience. Maybe even ask some of the students what they think of feature x on their computers. Plus, you should realize, with the age of these kids, you probably just going to need a web browser so they can get on MySpace/Facebook...

[dhave]

If you mean "simple" and not "simplistic", as I assume you do, then xfce4 would be a excellent choice. IceWM is also good. The ultralight window managers like fluxbox are very fast and quite configurable, but they'd be difficult to use for someone coming directly from Windows.

If you do need to offer an especially easy transition from Windows, there are specialized environments for that, too. In the free world, I think icewm provides a good bridge. If you're a little more adventurous, there's a Brazilian environment called TDE ("Techisa Desktop Environment") at http://codigolivre.org.br/projects/tde/. It defaults to Portuguese but can display English, too. It will feel very familiar to Windows users, but I don't know how large or active the support community is.

[Dralnu]

I totally forgot about IceWM. It integrated well into KDE, as well.

You can throw any panel into a WM (almost), so thats always an option, even with a *box.

I would NOT suggest wmii/dwm/other VERY minimal window managers. A *box setup would probably be as minimal as you would even want to attempt, though if you use a thinclient setup, you could try several, and just let the user pick their own.

[bos_mindwarp]

I wouldn't recommend kde, actually. My impression is when people sit in front of kde for the first time, they can't find shit. Browser is called Konqueror, movie player Kaffeine, audio player Amarok, etc, you get the idea.